State ex rel. Eberhardt v. Flxible Corp.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtAlice Robie Resnick, J.
This court employs the “some evidence” rule in determining the propriety of mandamus actions which challenge the commission’s factual findings. Where the record contains some evidence to support the commission’s factual conclusions, its decision will stand. Conversely, where the record contains no evidence to support the commission’s order, an abuse of discretion will be found. See State ex rel. Hughes v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (1986), 26 Ohio St.3d 71, 73, 26 OBR 61, 63, 498 N.E.2d 459, 461; State ex rel. Kokocinski v. Indus. Comm. (1984), 11 Ohio St.3d 186, 188, 11 OBR 499, 500-501, 464…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- State ex rel. Burley v. Coil Packing, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1987
- State ex rel. Paragon v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- Vulcan Materials Co. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1986
- State ex rel. Jennings v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1982
- State ex rel. Hutton v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1972
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by81 opinions
- State Ex Rel. George v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2011
- State ex rel. Chrysler Corp. v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- State ex rel. Marchiano v. School Employees Retirement SystemOhio Supreme Court · 2009
- State ex rel. Navistar, Inc. v. Indus. Comm. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
- Phipps v. Internatl. Paper Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2013
76 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.